[Ben Fowler <wapdev@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > I understand that. My request which does mean more work and will take up
> > more space for most people would be have a separate, smaller field for the
> > tooltip, not to enlarge the blurb field.
>
> I'm starting to wonder if our current method of protocol/field registration
> isn't exactly what we need. It almost seems that we need a separate file, with
> a syntax more readable than a C array, which describes the protocol/field,
> including blurb and tooltip. This human-readable file is parsed and two
> separate C files are made from it, one with just the data necessary for
> dissecting, and one with the strings. Tethereal needs just the dissection
> info, while Ethereal needs both.

Thank you. Whilst I don't really have the depth of understanding of the code
to comment, I agree with all that (and the part that I snipped). Could I 
suggest that
any supplementary files are in XML format with a DOCTYPE. There may need
to be features in ethereal to cope the a situation that someone tries to
compile ethereal with faulty or missing files.

Ben.



--
Leedsnet - The information resource for Leeds and the West Riding
< URL:http://www.leedsnet.com/mobile/ >